Template talk:Infobox award

Producer clarification
I had previously asked similarly regarding this back in February 2021- what is supposed to be listed for this parameter? All the documentation says is, "show's producer". This could be a range of things, including those credited as 'producer' (like the parameter is named), those credited as 'executive producer', or it could be the main production company behind an awards show. If there isn't a specific one of these options that should be listed, I suggest changing that and updating the documentation as such. It should be more clear what exactly is supposed to be listed here. Magitroopa (talk) 05:50, 1 February 2023 (UTC)


 * Please see further/recent discussions of this at WT:TV. And seriously, some other input would be greatly appreciated rather than just ignoring this issue. Magitroopa (talk) 05:23, 13 March 2023 (UTC)

Edit request 3 February 2023
Description of suggested change: Please add new parameter "time" (presentation time) if possible as shown in Sandbox Facts707 (talk) 08:08, 3 February 2023 (UTC)


 * I think this infobox is more about the award itself than the presentation of the award. Putting a "time" field might confuse people because it could mean lots of things, e.g. how long has the person had this award? &mdash; Martin (MSGJ · talk) 13:52, 3 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done for now: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the template. How does it help readers to have this information in the infobox? What time zone should be used? If the time of the award ceremony is truly important, you can put it in the date field. – Jonesey95 (talk) 18:07, 3 February 2023 (UTC)

Template-protected edit request on 13 August 2023
Please add the missing parameters ribbon, obverse and reverse to the list of valid parameters for the unsupported parameter check at the bottom of the template. This will remove e.g. Jeevan Raksha Padak from Category:Pages using infobox award with unknown parameters, where it is currently erroneously placed. The change has been made and tested in the sandbox. Wham2001 (talk) 13:41, 13 August 2023 (UTC)


 * . Please make sure the template documentation page has been updated, as well.  P.I. Ellsworth &thinsp;, ed.  put'er there 23:30, 13 August 2023 (UTC)
 * Thanks! I had already added the missing parameters to the docs, but I made a few other updates / improvements.
 * While editing the docs I noticed that one of the template parameters (former name has a space rather than an underscore. This is inconsistent with the other template parameters and (as far as I know, though I'm not a template expert) general usage.  Should it be renamed, and if so how does one go about doing so?  The parameters is used on about 776 articles (according to this search, which is clearly not perfect).  Thanks, Wham2001 (talk) 09:20, 14 August 2023 (UTC)


 * Thank you very much! The former name parameter has been supplemented with former_name, so both will work. Thanks again!  P.I. Ellsworth &thinsp;, ed.  put'er there 10:00, 14 August 2023 (UTC)
 * If at some point it becomes necessary to remove parameters and/or do a larger bad-parameter cleanup, I can set up a bot run to replace them. Primefac (talk) 10:46, 16 August 2023 (UTC)
 * I can see advantages to converting all uses of former name to former_name (consistency, potential for confusion) and disadvantages (breaking old revisions, watchlist spamming). I don't really have enough experience working with templates to know where the balance of utility would lie – I think that you and Paine Ellsworth likely would know better.  I agree that if it's to be changed it's much better if Primebot makes the edits.  Thanks, Wham2001 (talk) 07:04, 18 August 2023 (UTC)
 * Much can be said for consistency, yet much can be said for "If it ain't broke, don't fix it." The former name parameter was added by editor back in 2014 with, so for almost a decade editors have been leaping over this hurdle with no discernible challenges. Maybe "well enough" should be "left alone"?  P.I. Ellsworth &thinsp;,  ed.  put'er there 08:38, 18 August 2023 (UTC)
 * Sounds sensible to me Best, Wham2001 (talk) 18:01, 18 August 2023 (UTC)

current_awards and piped links
I don't understand how this field is supposed to work. As of 2/3/2024, Robin Boyd Award is throwing an error at Category:Pages using infobox award with unknown parameters because of its

current_awards =Lyons|Lyons (architecture firm)

line. The template documentation says to omit the wikilinks as the formatting is automatic, but then what is one to do in cases like this? Zaathras (talk) 18:49, 3 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Huh. That's not ideal coding for piped links. In your example above you put the order wrong, and needed to use a ! for the pipe (Special:Diff/1203220725) so that it shows properly, but I do agree that's not terribly clear from the /doc. A line might need to be added about piping using !, otherwise the code may need to be changed. Primefac (talk) 12:10, 4 February 2024 (UTC)
 * I didn't make the edit there initially, came across it while going through Category:Infoboxes with unknown parameters, a gnomish, maintenance kinds of fixing mode I've actually come to like doing lately. I pretend I'm in a tiny sub-sub-office in a corner of Brazil. Thanks for the fix, I had no idea how to go about it. Zaathras (talk) 14:18, 4 February 2024 (UTC)

Add option to skip automatic formatting from current_awards?
Would it be possible to add an option to skip automatic wikilinking of entries in the current_awards field?

The current behavior isn't compatible with piping wikilinks, and it'll create red links if there's no article for the entry.

Every other place in wikipedia trusts editors to add wikilinks when appropriate, so I'm not sure why this one field does it automatically.

I understand changing the existing behavior would break lots of existing infoboxes, but could an option be added to skip the automatic wikilinking?

Stephen Hui (talk) 18:53, 27 April 2024 (UTC)


 * Give an example of where this isn't working please. Gonnym (talk) 20:02, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
 * It was showing incorrectly in Good Food Awards from the article's creation until today (when I removed the usage of the current_awards field) because of the attempted use of piped wikilinks.
 * Previous version of the article showing how it was showing incorrectly here:.
 * Stephen Hui (talk) 02:37, 28 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Niether the previous edit nor your fix is using the parameter correctly. Usually when something is broken, the correct fix it is to the data, not the template. current_awards as can be seen in British Independent Film Awards, is to link to the article of the edition of the awards, not a random collections of words. Gonnym (talk) 02:57, 28 April 2024 (UTC)
 * I acknowledge that the parameter wasn't being used as intended by the previous author, and now that I understand its purpose, I agree that a change to the template isn't merited.
 * I beg to differ that my (admittedly hacky) "fix" wasn't using the parameter correctly (as my fix was to not use the parameter whatsoever), and that the article contained a "random collection of words" (it's a list of award categories). But that's out of scope for a conversation about this template.
 * Stephen Hui (talk) 06:11, 29 April 2024 (UTC)